Open thread: Sunday morning talking heads

posted at 8:01 am on May 12, 2013 by Allahpundit

Lots of Benghazi this morning, with the State Department’s ARB chairman Thomas Pickering hitting NBC, CBS, and CNN to talk about Wednesday’s testimony from Greg Hicks. All eyes are on Darrell Issa, though, who’ll be the featured guest on “Meet the Press” and who suddenly has not one, not two, but three administration scandals to investigate: Benghazi, the IRS’s anti-conservative cretinism, and the momentarily overlooked news that Kathleen Sebelius was kinda sorta extorting the health-care industry to chip in and pay for ObamaCare. Issa’s committee will be busy until fall.

Also, John McCain will be on ABC because it’s Sunday and that’s what McCain does on Sundays. The full line-up is at Politico.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Fox News starts with one meager 15 minute segment combining Benghazi and the IRS scandal, and then jumps into an interview with Mark Sanford??? The Obama Administration is mired in HUGE scandals up to its’ eyeballs and FNS wants to go hike the Appalachian Trail? Talk about jumpin’ the shark, Sanford is old news.

The common thread in each of these scandals is corruption and a willingness to abuse the expanded powers of big government–while failing to carry out the most basic responsibilities of any government.

In Benghazi, Obama a) failed to take action to save American diplomats in danger, then b) lied about it, with the enthusiastic help of mainstream media journalists (some of whom now want to blame Mitt Romney).

In Pigford, Obama pushed for additional billions in federal spending on fraudulent “reparations” processes that was abused in the name of real victims of racial discrimination–all so he could pay off key voting blocs.

In Obamacare, Obama rushed through a massive, unworkable law–then granted waivers to key companies and a disproportionate number of unions while his congressional allies worked to exempt themselves.
In the IRS scandal, the taxman targeted Tea Party and conservative groups–including, apparently, at least one pro-Israel group. It happened on Obama’s watch; we may yet learn that it happened with his approval.

And in the ongoing immigration debate, special interests are writing yet another massive big government expansion while refusing to strengthen border security provisions–and, like Obamacare, rushing it through.

Schlichter could have added the National Labor Relations Board scandal, in which the president exceeded his constitutional appointment power–and continues to ignore a federal court ruling against him.

Well said. There are few things so creepily artificial as watching the press pretend they were mislead on Benghazi. They knew the video story was crap all along, but they pursued it and talked about it as if it was real to continue tongue bathing their her0.

I have nothing but contempt for the media and find them to be actively anti-American at this point. There is no use saying that they are not, as that’s how they were educated by a leftist academia. Some, like Tapper, were pink diaper babies and it’s not going to change. Jake can call himself a “political agnostic” until the moon turns blue, but with his family ties…sorry, can’t buy it.

If we are to clean up the media we must insist that academia change as well.

First lady Michelle Obama urged Eastern Kentucky University graduates on Saturday night to reach out to people with different political beliefs, saying the country would benefit from the conversations.

“If you’re a Democrat, spend some time talking to a Republican,” Mrs. Obama told about 600 education, business and technology graduates at the third and final commencement ceremony of the day. “And if you’re a Republican, have a chat with a Democrat. Maybe you’ll find some common ground, maybe you won’t.”…”

I wish he would get over his man crush on Senator Juan McLame so we could get a new RINO face to bash us “wacko-birds” when we need it. If he’d just call his MSM lackeys, we could have Senator Graham or maybe even a real liberal like Senator Sanders to tell everyone what jerks we are.

I have stories which I don’t tell but try to relish the good and suggest items about the bad.

I come here and make remarks that some Dems are absolute jerks based on numerous shards of information and then some poobahs here stick up for them.

She dealt directly with some people under this Goldwater flag and indirectly with an organization.

She did us no favors but civility and kindness. We aren’t bought!

She has grown into her position and fills it well. If you would compare her with the some ivy league educated Dem ladies, you would thank God for her*. Her treatment of conservatives make it almost unbelievable that she is from Chicago by way of Princeton.

She is a diamond and so strong that the rotten remarks here and elsewhere will do noting but blow off the room dust.

* You don’t know half of the America and white male hating in the government. Being conservative on top of that isn’t like being a German Jew in the 1930′s but it sure isn’t the cool thing, either.

“Pope Francis on Sunday gave the Catholic church new saints, including hundreds of 15th-century martyrs who were beheaded for refusing to convert to Islam, as he led his first canonization ceremony Sunday before tens of thousands of people in St. Peter’s Square.

The `’Martyrs of Otranto” are 813 Italians who were slain in the southern Italian city in 1480 for defying demands by Turkish invaders to renounce Christianity….

Francis told the crowd that the martyrs are a source of inspiration, especially for `’so many Christians, who, right in these times and in so many parts of the world, still suffer violence.” He prayed that they receive `’the courage of loyalty and to respond to evil with good.”

The pope didn’t single out any country. But Christian churches have been attacked in Nigeria and Iraq, and Catholics in China loyal to the Vatican have been subject to harassment and sometimes jail over the last decades.

The first pontiff from South America also canonized another Latin American woman. Maria Guadalupe Garcia Zavala, a Mexican who dedicated herself to nursing the sick, helped Catholics avoid persecution during a government crackdown of the faith in the 1920s. Also known as Mother Lupita, she hid the Guadalajara archbishop in an eye clinic for more than a year after fearful local Catholic families refused to shelter him…”

Well said. There are few things so creepily artificial as watching the press pretend they were mislead on Benghazi. They knew the video story was crap all along, but they pursued it and talked about it as if it was real to continue tongue bathing their her0.

I have nothing but contempt for the media and find them to be actively anti-American at this point. There is no use saying that they are not, as that’s how they were educated by a leftist academia. Some, like Tapper, were pink diaper babies and it’s not going to change. Jake can call himself a “political agnostic” until the moon turns blue, but with his family ties…sorry, can’t buy it.

If we are to clean up the media we must insist that academia change as well.

I find it a bit amazing that Libya is crumbling at the same time the Benghazi cover story is. And what’s even more astounding is that Gaddafi himself predicted Libya would fall to the jihadists if his regime was overthrown.
The administration is losing control on all fronts all at the same time.

I find it a bit amazing that Libya is crumbling at the same time the Benghazi cover story is. And what’s even more astounding is that Gaddafi himself predicted Libya would fall to the jihadists if his regime was overthrown.
The administration is losing control on all fronts all at the same time.

Fox News starts with one meager 15 minute segment combining Benghazi and the IRS scandal, and then jumps into an interview with Mark Sanford??? The Obama Administration is mired in HUGE scandals up to its’ eyeballs and FNS wants to go hike the Appalachian Trail? Talk about jumpin’ the shark, Sanford is old news.

PatMac on May 12, 2013 at 9:53 AM

They are in business to make money, and while we would cheer long, in depth, scandal coverage, ah, nevermind. They should be doing long, in depth, scandal coverage.

We need to press on these scandals and IMPEACH or IMPRISON those in our government that misuse their offices.

you think there would be this much interest in benghazi from the republicans if Bush were President? therein lies the answer

remember how concerned baggers were with the deficit while bush was in office…oh wait, there was no bagger movement while bush was in office.

nonpartisan on May 12, 2013 at 9:03 AM

Actually yes. At least a handful of Republicans would’ve been interested in Benghazi. You may not have noticed this since you’re a liberal Democrat, but the GOP has no problem throwing its own members under the bus. Even a President if things get too messy(see Richard Nixon).

And the truth is, the reaction of Republicans on Capitol Hill would’ve been irrelevant. Because if anything like the Benghazi coverup had happened on Bush’s watch(particularly less than 2 months out from an election), the Democrat/media complex would’ve been hammering away at that story 24/7 and ensured that his numbers plummeted as Election Day approached.

“The Democrat Party and the media are indistinguishable from one another and it doesn’t take much digging to prove it…

In what may be a belated effort to salvage its reputation, or perhaps an effort to get the best scoop now that keeping quiet is out of the question, ABC published a story revealing that there were twelve revisions of the Benghazi memo. The final version eradicated all references to terrorists and al Qaeda. Nice work, Mr. Fiction Writer!

…The only mainstream media reporter really doing her job is CBS’s Sharyl Attkison. Attkison has also done a heroic job on the Fast N’ Furious Eric Holder gun running scandal. Now it appears CBS is pressuring her to leave. Gee, wonder why?

Whatever shred of credibility existed among the network news organizations has now been utterly obliterated.

how many men died in iraq because Congress, including the current and former Democrat Secretaries of State, authorized that war.

nonIQ on May 12, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Fixed.

Just curious, Chelsea, where was your concern for the thousands of American service members who died in non-combat during the 8 years (Democrat) pResident Bill Clinton was Commander in Chief? That number exceeded combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

Must be 5 PM somewhere in the world, eh? Because your post made zero sense. I take it you are somehow impressed with Michelle Obama, but have no way of decoding what you scribbled above in order to understand why.

Would a diamond use taxpayer funds during economically hard times to arrange star-studded White House dinners?
Would a diamond use taxpayer funds during economically hard times to enjoy Wagu beef and lobster every night?
Would a diamond talk about how the country was “mean”?
Would a diamond expend millions of taxpayer dollars while so many in the country are hurting to have her and the girls flown separately to Hawaii when her husband was leaving only a few hours later?
Would a diamond presume to tell schools not what they should, but what they must serve as school lunches?
Would a diamond force specific dietary lunches on schools and, under penalty of law, prevent schools from offering certain snacks?

Would someone who liked Goldwater really think that a statist like Michelle is a diamond?

“Under President Obama the Internal Revenue Service has repeatedly been accused of using its enforcement powers to punish the White House’s political opponents. Here are six of the most egregious examples.

1. The IRS Targeted Conservative Political Organizations for Investigation

On Friday, the IRS admitted that career employees had specifically targeted organizations that had “Tea Party” or “Patriot” in their name.

The harassment of these conservative groups included intrusive and inappropriate questionnaires and a threat to make all the confidential information public. The targeting included explicitly asking for donor lists from conservative organizations as part of their application process.

“We made some mistakes, some people didn’t use good judgment. For that, we’re apologetic,” acknowledged the director of the IRS division overseeing tax-exempt groups, Lois Lerner.

Last year, before a hearing at the House of Representatives, then IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman said, “there’s absolutely no targeting. This is the kind of back and forth that happens to people.” And still the IRS claims that the targeting of conservative groups was “in no way due to any political or partisan rationale.”

2. ProPublica Published Confidential IRS Filings on Six Conservative Organizations

From December 2012 to January 2013, ProPublica published the confidential pending IRS applications for tax-exempt status of six conservative organizations.

ProPublica acknowledged that the IRS was not supposed to release information on pending claims for tax-exempt status after publishing Crossroad GPS’s application.

“[IRS spokeswoman Michelle Eldridge] cited a law saying that publishing unauthorized returns or return information was a felony punishable by a fine of up to $5,000 and imprisonment of up to five years, or both,” according to ProPublica.

Despite being informed of the illegality, confidential applications from the five other organizations were discussed in January.

3. Austan Goolsbee, Then Chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, Divulged on a Conference Call Confidential IRS Information on How Koch Industries Was Organized

In a background call with reporters, a “senior administration official” used Koch Industries as an example of how large corporations used corporate structures to avoid taxes.

In the course of attacking Koch Industries, which employs over 50,000 people and is owned by prominent conservative philanthropists Charles and David Koch, the official divulged confidential tax information about the company. The official was later outed as Austan Goolsbee, the former director of the president’s Economic Recovery Board and then chair of the Council Of Economic Advisers.

In 2010 an investigation led by the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, Russell George, was opened after Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee requested it. The results of the investigation have not been publicly communicated, and will not be released unless Senate Democrats permit it.

4. Donors to Nonprofit Advocacy Groups Were Told that Past Donations Could Be Taxed as Gifts

After not levying a gift tax for decades, the IRS investigated five donors to political advocacy nonprofits. Among those to receive letters threatening additional levies and taxes was conservative philanthropist Foster Friess, and the move was widely seen as an attempt to intimidate conservative organizations and donors on the eve of the 2010 midterm elections.

“Retroactive enforcement of the gift tax in this highly politicized environment raises legitimate concerns and demands further explanation,” six Republican senators, lead by Sen. Orrin Hatch, said in a letter to the IRS.

The agency was forced to abandon its efforts to enforce the rarely used gift tax on donations, acknowledging that, “This is a difficult area… with respect to which we have little enforcement history.” Again, the agency blamed “career civil servants.”
5. After Being Singled Out by an Obama Campaign Website, a Romney Supporter Was Investigated by The IRS and the Department of Labor

During President Obama’s reelection campaign, Frank VanderSloot, a contributor to pro-Romney campaign organizations, was said by the Obama campaign to have a “less-than-reputable record” and to be a “bitter foe of the gay rights movement.”

A few months later, VanderSloot and his wife were told by the IRS they were being audited for the first time, looking over two years of past fillings.

Two weeks later, the Department of Labor informed VanderSloot that he was being investigated to ensure the three foreign workers he employs on his ranch received “the full scope of protections.”

6. The IRS Claims It Can Read Your Emails without a Warrant

According to documents released last month under the Freedom of Information Act, the IRS “has long taken the position that the IRS can read your emails without a warrant—a practice that one appeals court has said violates the Fourth Amendment.” That news came last month from the ACLU, which which had filed the FOIA request.

IRS lawyers asserted that Americans are entitled to “generally no privacy” in their online communications—including email.

CNET reported that “the IRS continued to take the same position, the documents indicate, even after a federal appeals court ruled in the 2010 case U.S. v. Warshak that Americans have a reasonable expectation of privacy in their e-mail.”

Bonus: Under Obamacare, the IRS Will Become the Key Enforcer on Health Care

Once Obamacare is fully implemented in 2014, the IRS will enforce 47 new tax provisions along with distributing subsidies to 18 million people and tax credits to small businesses.

The Treasury Department expects the cost of enforcement from 2010 to 2013 to total $881 million. Former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman informed Congress last year the agency would need an additional $13.1 billion in 2014…”

Meet the Press, in full spin mode for Obama….disgusting, even super libs are writing that the white house is not looking good in this, and MTP is clinging to the lib talking points

lostinjrz on May 12, 2013 at 10:48 AM

It’s NBC “News”. What did you expect? We could have Obama giving his farewell address after resigning from office in disgrace and NBC and MSNBC would still be defending him against those nasty, partisan Republicans.

BTW, that clip of David Gregory whining “what coverup?!” to McCain ain’t looking too good right about now.

“For those of you who have forgotten: During the 2008 presidential campaign, the Obamas originally tried to suppress the thesis until after the election, eventually relenting and allowing it to be leaked to Politico, which published it as four separate pdfs. Later, other sites published the whole thing as a single pdf, which for convenience’s sake I’ll link directly to here:

As soon as the thesis was released, it immediately became apparent why the Obamas were trying to keep it under wraps: The entire introduction revolves around the separateness Michelle Obama (then using her maiden name Michelle Robinson) felt from white people, white values and the white community. A few excerpts:

“My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my ‘Blackness’ than ever before. I have found that at Princeton no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my White professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don’t belong.”

“These experiences have made it apparent to me that the path I have chosen to follow by attending Princeton will likely lead to my further intergration and/or assimilation into a White cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant. This realization has presently, made my goals to actively utilize my resources to benefit the Black community more desirable.”

“Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their enrollments.”

“…It is conceivable that my four years of exposure to a predominantly White, Ivy League university has instilled within me certain conservative values. For example, as I enter my final year at Princeton, I find myself striving for many of the same goals as my White classmates — acceptance to a prestigious graduate school or a high-paying position in a successful corporation.”

“Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with Whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be Black first and a student second.”

The rest of the thesis is a survey of other black students, asking them if they feel as alienated, offended, ungrateful and, well, as angry as she does. Along the way, she cites former Black Panther and racial separatist Stokely Carmichael as one of the writers whose thinking “guided” her.

Want to know why America sees you as “some kind of angry black woman”? Look in the mirror, Michelle.

UPDATE:

In the final pages of the thesis, Michelle bemoans the integration of successful African-Americans into “White culture,” and sympathizes with the separatist position — that blacks and whites should maintain separate group identities:

These excerpts are from the final 14 pages of Michelle Obama’s thesis:

“However, with the increasing integration of Blacks into the mainstream society, many ‘integrated Blacks’ have lost touch with the Black culture in their attempts to become adjusted and comfortable in their new culture–the White culture. Some of these Blacks are no longer able to enjoy the qualities which make Black culture so unique or are unable to openly share their culture with other Blacks because they have become so far removed from these experiences and, in some instances, ashamed of them as a result of their integration.”

“My speculation for this finding is based on the possibility that a separationist is more likely to have a realistic impression of the plight of the Black lower class because of the likelihood that a separationist is more closely associated with the Black lower class than are integrationist. By actually working with the Black lower class or within their communities as a result of their ideologies, a separationist may better understand the desparation of their situation and feel more hopeless about a resolution as opposed to an integrationist who is ignorant to their plight.”

“I wondered whether or not my education at Princeton would affect my identification with the Black community. I hoped that these findings would help me conclude that despite the high degree of identification with Whites as a result of the educational and occupational path that Black Princeton alumni follow, the alumni would still maintain a certain level of identification with the Black community. However, these findings do not support this possibility.”

Would be interesting (to me, anyway) to know what actions nonpartisan would have taken if it had been the SOS when Hicks called @2am with the same news, and why.
What does it consider the proper ways to handle that situation, at that time ?

Couldn’t be more disappointed in Issa.
He’s been given 3 “crises” now where Obama should be impeached and even sitting behind bars, and Issa can’t even get anyone to pay attention.
I wish someone with a little more intensity and passion were at the helm.

cmsinaz on May 12, 2013 at 10:33 AM tencole on May 12, 2013 at 12:35 PM

I didn’t see the show but I imagine that the Republicans are still in the “finding the truth” stage and don’t want to call it anything bigger at this point. Probably a good strategy considering they might get more whistle blowers. Maybe even Gen. Petraeus. Besides, I don’t want them to come to any conclusions too early, I want to see who throws who under the bus. Early indications would suggest that Obama will blame Hillary since no one seemed to bite on Carey’s throw back go to guy, W.

“With every violent act in the news, the media search began for a Tea Party connection to confirm the now-failed ”eliminationist narrative.” Sometimes the connection was invented out of thin air, and then amplified by the media, as in the cases of the Gabby Giffords and Aurora movie theater shootings.

There has been an unrelenting assault on the Tea Party movement by Democrats and the media. Sometimes establishment Republicans piled on, but they were the tail on the Tea Party-hating Democratic-media dog.

Is it any wonder that “low level” IRS employees took it on themselves to target Tea Party-related groups? And is it any wonder that senior level officials knew about it?

This didn’t happen in a vacuum. This abuse of the Tea Party movement by the IRS was three years in the making.

Those IRS employees simply reaped the hatred of the Tea Party sown by Democrats and the media….”

That was awful how those Islamic terrorists or CIA mercenaries attacked Val after being outed by the nefarious Bush administration.

She and her husband and security who tried to save them all killed.

They should make a movie about something so horrible and maybe get Sean Penn and Hugo Chavez for it.

IlikedAUH2O on May 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM

For you folks in Rio Linda, this post was a contrast. It described an alleged political reprisal in the way of an “outing” of a covert agent to harm her husband who wrote a report which did not support the Bush administration’s characterization of Saddam Hussein’s attempts to acquire WMDs. It was media focus for years and led to a movie. This was the “Val” mentioned.

A contrast was made to Benghazi and the way ‘covert’ or intelligence operations can and do, lead to violence and death.

There is little interest in those people who were really at risk and paid with their lives while media darling “Val” escaped unscathed.

As additional information comes out on the Benghazi affair, it’s difficult to determine what is true and what are lies. The prevailing opinion, however, is that the reason for the administration’s coverup just before the 2012 election is that because al-Qa’ida was said to be destroyed, any terrorist attack had to be conveyed to the public as just an out of control mob angry about a video released months before that nobody had seen. That might have made sense if the sole purpose was to deflect criticism over claims of terrorism having been defeated, especially in an election year, but it doesn’t explain why no help was given to the besieged diplomatic facility. After all, even if it had been an angry mob, why did the administration not come to the rescue? There had to be more to it. But what? Here’s my theory:

Based on what I’ve heard, it appears that Ambassador Stevens was meeting with the Turkish Ambassador just prior to the attack. The subject was alleged to be the transfer of arms given to the Libyan rebels onward to the Syrian rebels via Turkey. Where were those arms? Reportedly in a warehouse at the site of the attack.

During that attack, one of the security detail’s former SEALs had a laser designator he was using to paint the enemy for precise targeting from overhead shooters or bombers. Why would a man detailed to protect our ambassador bring along a laser designator unless he knew it would be useful? That indicates he expected some kind of overhead aircraft to provide security. Was it the drone that reportedly was providing real time imagery of the attack?
In any case, the overhead shooter or bomber never responded. For that matter, pleas for help by the security detail during the seven or more hour battle were also ignored and the excuses given as to why are ludicrous.

Well, suppose the aircraft or drone was there, at the behest of the CIA, to protect the warehouse until the materiel was shipped? But what if the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) rebels knew about the warehouse and wanted those weapons for their own purposes, such as shipping them to Gaza? And what if the CIA was expecting to ship the materiel to Syria but people with MB connections in the White House decided, with President Obama’s approval, to give them to the MB for use in Gaza instead? They couldn’t do it openly because Israel and its supporters would protest. So what if the MB liaison at the White House told the local rebels at the behest of Obama that they were to seize the weapons so that it would not look like the administration voluntarily gave them to Israel’s enemies?

Moreover, what if they didn’t tell the CIA so that there would be further cover? In that case, when the ambassador and his compound came under attack, it was a smokescreen for the real purpose, seizing the warehouse materiel. But if the overhead aircraft fired to kill or disperse the MB rebels it would be expected to protect the warehouse, too. That may have been its main mission. So rather than protect both sites, it was ordered to protect neither, sacrificing the ambassador so that the MB could get the weapons.

And rather than admit the ambassador and his detail were sacrificed for the benefit of the MB, the administration would claim it was a spontaneous mob, thereby disassociating themselves from the MB rebels. Why else would they claim that fabrication for two weeks when, in fact, they knew it wasn’t true?

It’s interesting that Gaza virtually declared war on Israel not long after the weapons disappeared from Benghazi by firing hundreds of rockets into Israel. It’s as if Hamas was daring the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) to come stop them. Would the IDF then find a well-armed hornet’s nest of weapons taken from Benghazi?

Since the MB is involved in Syrian operations, why would their branch in Gaza (Hamas) need to steal the weapons? Turkey, which has been trying to send flotillas of aid, including weapons, to Gaza has been consistently stopped by the Israeli navy. So, it may also be that Turkey was involved in getting the weapons to Gaza via the overland route through Egypt. Under its new MB regime, Egypt would be willing to allow a transit. However, Egypt stopped the incipient war that Hamas was trying to provoke, probably because MB is still consolidating power in Egypt and viewed war with Israel as premature.

Finally, various rebel factions have reportedly been squabbling over the allocation of the weapons from Libya. Hamas may have wanted a cut instead of seeing all the weapons go to Syria. And rather than confront the rebels in Syrian, Hamas may have decided not to inform them that they were taking the weapons.

Allegedly, the new head of the CIA, former General Petraeus, was betrayed by his subordinates who outed his affair with Paula Broadwell because they didn’t like his administration. That seems unlikely, given that under President Carter, his CIA head, former Stansfield Turner, gutted the Clandestine Service and made plain his disdain for the CIA. The staff didn’t turn on him. However, if the CIA staff didn’t realize that the White House was responsible for the betrayal of Ambassador Stevens and the CIA operation, they may have unjustly blamed Petraeus. That may have been enough to provoke mutiny. However, as indicated in the essay on the Petraeus affair, there may be more to it than the alleged CIA revolt.

But with the attack happening less than two months before voters went to the polls last year, “they may have made the decision that it was better to win the presidential election and deal with the fallout on the other side,” Lehane said.

So Hussein never did nor is still politicizing Benghazi, right ? It’s those darned Republicans ..